Pilot Shortage Deepens, USAF is SCREWED.

[Stoker]

6 minutes ago, HAWDINGL said:

https://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2018/March%202018/Goldfein-Solutions-for-the-Pilot-Crisis-Center-on-Diversity.aspx

 

Problem has already been solved at the highest level, everyone back to work!

 

"grouping minority pilot trainees together at flight school" uhh, what? I thought Truman nixed that idea back in 1948.

[DirkDiggler]

4 hours ago, Jaded said:

This guy was also asking how people would feel if students went directly from the T-6 to C-130 units. You know, since they both have propellers.

That has to be a joke right?....

[Boomer6]

42 minutes ago, RTB said:

And one of the ideas is to essentially re-segregate minorities into their own classes??  Truly unbelievable.

They're planning on completely getting rid of the UPT class system now so it'll be interesting to see how they implement this.. 

[Mikey Donuts]

1 hour ago, RTB said:

And one of the ideas is to essentially re-segregate minorities into their own classes??  Truly unbelievable.

Dibs on the "Puerto-Rican/Italian married to an Asian" flight commander job.

 

Edited March 11, 2018 by Mikey Donuts

[BashiChuni]

i can't believe they just advocated for segregation. jesus h. christ.

 

[Vimix22]

1 hour ago, Boomer6 said:

They're planning on completely getting rid of the UPT class system now so it'll be interesting to see how they implement this.. 

No more classes?

[jazzdude]

They're planning on completely getting rid of the UPT class system now so it'll be interesting to see how they implement this.. 

So basically like navy UPT? Assigned a class for admin purposes, but practically you were a class of 1 when it came to scheduling?

Gotta get rid of formal brief, stand-up EPs would be interesting to get a group for (are the group's based on last event completed?), and formal release wouldn't make sense either.

Not to mention that track select and assignments get weird: "You did great, but no 38s this week, sorry, needs of the AF..."

[Sprkt69]

9 hours ago, Boomer6 said:

No sweat. They're cutting the T-6 syllabus by approx. 13 hrs, changing Phase 1 and 2 to a Navy style syllabus, and eliminating sorties/requirements and other training from the -38 side all to up the production. Should have plenty of "qualified" pilots on their way to the CAF in no time! 

Didn’t you know that the US is trying to even the playing field with all the other 3rd world nations in the name of fairness? 

[Jaded]

2 hours ago, DirkDiggler said:

That has to be a joke right?....

And I quote, "Turboprop pilots... if the Air Force could send T-6 students direct to turboprop aircraft, which platforms would be willing to accept? And what would need to be taught" 

[nunya]

Because your first V1 cut SHOULD be in a 120,000 lb, 4 engine airplane.

[nunya]

 A sleek trainer jet parked on a tarmac is “a great visual,” for kids, Goldfein said, especially if a woman or pilot of color is standing with it. 

Awesome.  So the white dudes can go to the bar while the minorities and women go do show-and-tell after their 3-hop XC to Austin.   

Who thinks this stuff up and doesn't filter it between their brain and their mouth?

[IMUA]

1 hour ago, nunya said:

Who thinks this stuff up and doesn't filter it between their brain and their mouth?

 

Nothing shocks me anymore....The more ludacris the plan the more likely to be said out loud, owned publicly by “leadership”, and ultimately implemented.

Nothing will stop the US air force.

Edited March 11, 2018 by IMUA
Grammer

[BFM this]

4 hours ago, HU&W said:

The one on TPN?  The idiocy of that dude's question almost baited me into a response.  I really wonder if the people coming up with these ideas are actually pilots.

That's quite the spirited discussion goin on over there.

 

[Danger41]

I’m all for it. I’m sick of these German-American descendants distracting me and my fellow Scandinavian-Americans from making lutefisk and mead in our Flight room with their lederhosen and pretzel shit. 

[hindsight2020]

I'm willing to give fingers the benefit of the doubt on the whole attempting to acknowledge the socioeconomic and cultural reasons why the pilot corps is predominantly white, but man the follow-through needs some serious work. It's incredibly condescending to suggest minorities don't pursue pilot work and/or thrive in said training environment because the demographics are white washed. Ask me how I know. Segregation is categorically not the answer. The problem is that the suggestion itself is indicative of the very tone deafness he accuses the Service of having in the first place. The fucking irony.

Tweaking standards is nothing new. Actually segregating classes though, that reaches a whole new level of FUBAR, in 2018 no less. What strange times we live in. What blows my skull is that all of it fundamentally stems from not wanting to give 13-year O-4s some measure of QOL control. That level of visceral recalcitrance against ceding even an RCH on the one-sided nature of military indentured servitude is why this won't ever be solved by so-called leadership. They almost rather lose a war than ever catch themselves negotiating with their 'human property'. In a way I understand the civilian trope about military membership being cannon fodder and "it was this or Walmart" economic draftee dynamics, as a collective. With the level of treatment we get out of management when it comes to non-economic retention measures, can we really say civilians have it wrong? Don't get me started on the UCMJ in garrison in a military with 1069% more women than when they wrote the god damn thing. Fact is, only a peer war will rip these derelicts off the helm.

 

Edited March 11, 2018 by hindsight2020

[IMUA]

15 minutes ago, hindsight2020 said:

Fact is, only a peer war will rip these derelicts off the helm.

 

Although completely barbaric...a mano y mano fight club type coup could be more entertaining and we could make some money if PPV wants to pick it up.

If GOs feel so strongly about their directions then fight me cause i sure as hell feel strongly enough to physically defend my stance in service dress!

If they’re passing their PT test they’re fit to fight right? Winner executes the way ahead.

Edited March 11, 2018 by IMUA

[LookieRookie]

10 hours ago, Jaded said:

This guy was also asking how people would feel if students went directly from the T-6 to C-130 units. You know, since they both have propellers.

Well in Hercs there's someone to get your ATIS.

[HeloDude]

I'm honestly wondering why this stuff surprises any of you.  In 2015 the SecAF said she wanted programs to recruit/promote more women and minorities.  Goldfein was her Vice Chief of Staff at this time...did we just think things would change when he became Chief of Staff?  Or perhaps you're surprised this is happening under Trump and SecAF Wilson?  Not me...the upper level GOs/civilians have been picked and put in place years ago because they buy into this way of thinking.  More people (i.e. pilots) getting out just means the AF/DoD can bring in more people they want to see (apparently women and minorities) as well as more easily promote the people they want to see at the higher ranks.  The AF is willing to spend more money on these initiatives instead of using that money/begging Congress to pay current pilots (who are mostly white males) to stay in.  

It's hard to be a conspiracy theorist when you can read the words they're saying.

Air Force secretary announces bold moves to boost women, minorities

https://www.tampabaydefensealliance.com/news/air-force-secretary-announces-bold-moves-boost-women-minorities

 

[ViperMan]

57 minutes ago, hindsight2020 said:

Tweaking standards is nothing new. Actually segregating classes though, that reaches a whole new level of FUBAR, in 2018 no less. What strange times we live in. What blows my skull is that all of it fundamentally stems from not wanting to give 13-year O-4s some measure of QOL control. That level of visceral recalcitrance against ceding even an RCH on the one-sided nature of military indentured servitude is why this won't ever be solved by so-called leadership. They almost rather lose a war than ever catch themselves negotiating with their 'human property'. In a way I understand the civilian trope about military membership being cannon fodder and "it was this or Walmart" economic draftee dynamics, as a collective. With the level of treatment we get out of management when it comes to non-economic retention measures, can we really say civilians have it wrong? Don't get me started on the UCMJ in garrison in a military with 1069% more women than when they wrote the god damn thing. Fact is, only a peer war will rip these derelicts off the helm.

God-damned poetry.

[hindsight2020]

36 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

I'm honestly wondering why this stuff surprises any of you.  In 2015 the SecAF said she wanted programs to recruit/promote more women and minorities.  Goldfein was her Vice Chief of Staff at this time...did we just think things would change when he became Chief of Staff?  Or perhaps you're surprised this is happening under Trump and SecAF Wilson?  Not me...the upper level GOs/civilians have been picked and put in place years ago because they buy into this way of thinking.  More people (i.e. pilots) getting out just means the AF/DoD can bring in more people they want to see (apparently women and minorities) as well as more easily promote the people they want to see at the higher ranks.  The AF is willing to spend more money on these initiatives instead of using that money/begging Congress to pay current pilots (who are mostly white males) to stay in.  

It's hard to be a conspiracy theorist when you can read the words they're saying.

Air Force secretary announces bold moves to boost women, minorities

https://www.tampabaydefensealliance.com/news/air-force-secretary-announces-bold-moves-boost-women-minorities

 

 

I think you're off target insinuating the retention problem is being purposely fostered in order to de-throne white nativism from white collar pay grades. Take a paper bag, breathe into it, and internalize viewing "American" identity from the prism of that anachronistic 1943 Norman Rockwell portrait may be your formative experience, but no longer represents the experience of the American Street by and large. By mid 21st century, Hispanics (Mexican Americans specifically, which does not equate to all Hispanics mind you) will be the majority of the USA. It is what it is. The sun will rise tomorrow. No need for the swan song.

Second, you're conflating issues here. There is NO production problem. Don't buy into that narrative. There's only a retention problem. What should put you at ease that they're not merely trying to run your white ass out of town, is that this retention problem has existed before, when there were even less non-whites in the pilot ranks. Historically, management has always banked on "run the clock offense" in order to solve it. That being, economic hiccups that stop airline hiring have always yielded those loud-mouth military separatees to crawl back to Uncle Sugar's teet when the airlines unapologetically give them the F-word treatment the morning after the economic crash. The problem here is that in 2013, this is no longer the historic case. Specifically, the boomer retirement numbers,  plus the post-BK and targeted consolidation of airline capacity (and rocketing load factors) by the remaining airlines has made a one-two punch that promises to last too long for the DOD to be able to effectively rely on 'run the clock offense' in order to solve this iteration of the same retention problem of yesteryear.

As a result, they're flailing publicly. Instead of being leaders and having the stones to publicly acknowledge the problems that make the 2013+  exodus different, they coward like the derelicts they are and create the fallacious "production problem" narrative, breaking AETC's back in the process, especially when you consider the absolute zero chance of the T-X being fielded in time to make a difference.

That's it man. Two different issues. No conspiracy theories here. You want to focus on the first one? Have at it hoss, but it's got zero to do with the second one. The airlines have had that issue forever too (read late 80s affirmative action hires at US legacies, military females included at the time mind you) so this theory isn't unique to the military. Don't be this guy if you can help it...

 

[matmacwc]

Uhhh, but not right now, and I thought the problem was immediate.  Lots of good stuff in your post, but recruiting the minority, whilst noble, won't fix the now problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States

[Pancake]

1 hour ago, hindsight2020 said:

The problem here is that in 2013, this is no longer the historic case. Specifically, the boomer retirement numbers,  plus the post-BK and targeted consolidation of airline capacity (and rocketing load factors)...

The airline business model is completely different than in previous downturns (then: market share, today: revenue generation). Future downturns will have less severe impact on the airlines, as efficiencies today (and profits) and retirements tomorrow will pad a softer landing (more likely to slow hiring than produce furloughs).

[hindsight2020]

46 minutes ago, matmacwc said:

Uhhh, but not right now, and I thought the problem was immediate.  Lots of good stuff in your post, but recruiting the minority, whilst noble, won't fix the now problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States

Indeed, and I'm certainly not advocating affirmative action is the solution to the "now" problem. And the whole canard of re-segregating races in training is an absolutely boneheaded and tone deaf utterance from the CSAF. I still can't believe they let such a tired ethnocentric utterance out as an official statement. 

 

My only point was to disprove the notion that there's an anti-Anglo conspiracy behind the Air Force's present inelasticity wrt addressing non-economic retention metrics. This is easily illustrated imo, by the fact the USAF has always been this inelastic in addressing QOL metrics for the 12-13 year O-4, along with those without ADSC balances. Particularly in a world that used to be even more white than today mind you. Thence, no conspiracy, just dereliction of duty by our so-called leaders.

What I want to avoid is giving credence to the production problem in the first place. I don't subscribe to that. I do not believe in the production problem narrative. I believe there's only a retention problem.

[NKAWTG]

2 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

 

Second, you're conflating issues here. There is NO production problem. Don't buy into that narrative. There's only a retention problem.

Not quite accurate.   They are fixing the retention problem by increasing production.  This "crisis" will have to be grown out of, instead of trying to convince those with a foot out the door to stay.  The current crop of 10+ year officers has lost faith in the Air Force and are not going to be tempted by money or promised QoL fixes.  We witnessed masters degree requirements become masked then unmasked, PT test failures treated like DUIs, Majors not offered continuation, pilots denied VSP and palace chase only to be RIF'd.  The promises of "this time, it's different" ring hollow.  

But the QoL stuff matters more than ever.  Class of 2018 is going to remember that senior pilot who spent his last year of service making Power Points in Afghanistan.  Trying  6 computers to find one that leaveweb works on, or having the mission manager email the flight plan to your cell phone because none of the damn printers work.  I expect these things to get better, because we are throwing money and people at them.  If it doesn't work, you'll see that in the retention rates 10 years from now.  

Though the cynic in me see the increase in production as a way to enable the "run out the clock" strategy as someone else so eloquently put.  Fingers will spend his entire term fixing the problems of his predecessors.  Will his successor move us forward, or be another McPeak or Schwartz.  Will the surge classes of 2018, 19 and 20 see RIF, VSP, and TERA again as airline hiring wanes.  It feels like we're in the one step forward phase right before we take two steps back.  

Edited March 12, 2018 by NKAWTG

[ImNotARobot]

What blows my skull is that all of it fundamentally stems from not wanting to give 13-year O-4s some measure of QOL control. That level of visceral recalcitrance against ceding even an RCH on the one-sided nature of military indentured servitude is why this won't ever be solved by so-called leadership. They almost rather lose a war than ever catch themselves negotiating with their 'human property'.

 

 

Eloquent af my friend. THAT is bullet number one for every one of us who couldn’t say WHY in enough different way as we ran for the door. You’re a mind reader.